Is Pain Dukkha?

Q & A
39

Very interesting question. What evidence do we have of dukkha describing purely physical pain? I ask this because the Buddha did not overcome physical pain, right? So if dukkha can include physical pain, then the Buddha did not overcome dukkha.

There in SN 38.14, the 3 types are:
Dukkhadukkhatā,
saṅ­khā­ra­duk­khatā,
vipari­ṇāma­duk­khatā

Thanissaro translates them as:
the stressfulness of pain,
the stressfulness of fabrication,
the stressfulness of change

I’m not sure about the word ‘stress’. Nor translating dukkha as both ‘stress’ and ‘pain’ - it that really valid for the first one?

How about leaving ‘dukkha’ untranslated for the moment. So

vipari­ṇāma­duk­khatā be more accurately classed as ‘the dukkha of changes for the worst’, or ‘the dukkha of disappointment’?. Because vipariṇāma doesn’t seem to be just the neutral term for ‘change’.

Then saṅ­khā­ra­duk­khatā… I find ‘the stressfulness of fabrication’ to be a rather meaningless term if I look with ordinary English eyes. It leaves me confused and with no idea what is being meant.
How about:
‘the dukkha of mental imprints?’
or…
‘the dukkha of complexity’? (referring to the compounded nature, but ‘compounded’ doesn’t do it for smooth English).
or…
‘the dukkha of volitional mental activity’?
‘the dukkha of mental tendencies/inclinations’?

Or if we take it to refer to ‘mental fabrications’, to use Thanissaro’s term:

mental fabrication: feeling (feeling tones of pleasure, pain, or neither
pleasure nor pain) and perception (the mental labels applied to the
objects of the senses for the purpose of memory and recognition).

then how about:
‘the dukkha of feeling and of the mental process of perception’?

But that still leaves the mystery of dukkhadukkhatā.

But my point here really is, could perhaps all dukkha be emotional? Negative emotional experience resultant from 3) things changing for the worse/disappointment; 2) mental tendencies of mental processing, maybe also of feeling. And 1)… I’m not sure, maybe the negative emotional experience of negative emotions themselves? Or maybe this is really two meanings of dukkha, the second being physical pain, such that it means: ‘negative emotional experience resultant from physical pain’?

Also, sukha is qualitative emotionally positive experience, is it not? And since dukkha is the opposite of sukha, would we not expect dukkha also to be emotional - positive emotional state?

I just can’t see how dukkha can include physical pain, since the Buddha had a chronic painful back, and died in pain also. But if anyone has any evidence of dukkha meaning physical pain (and no merely emotional pain in response to physical pain), then please share about it here!

1 Like
40

Okay, I greatly appreciate you stating your position so succinctly, which fwiw, I am inclined to agree with.

However it occurs to me that, to say,

“I think it [pain] is dukkha for both the worldling and the Arahant”

, as you have, is to effectively say the arhat remains subject to dukkha (at least prior to paranibbana), and this seems both to go against the general consensus, and be less than ideal.

Yet, the only other real option is to effectively take the opposite stance, as @Martin has;

“My assumption is that the cessation of dukkha equates to the cessation of the second arrow, mental anguish, ie for an Arahant bodily pain is no longer dukkha.”

, which then opens up to the question I have posed in reply, i.e.

“Considering what you say [about the darts, now], is it not the case that by extension we would have to concede that animals, and babies can’t suffer?”

, which again must be viewed as being less than ideal.

It’s quite the conundrum.

(btw, apologies to all - I can’t seem to link to specific text in post, I’m not sure either of my browsers are compatible with the task for some reason)

41

Happiness seeing explicit examples of good speech. Plus benefitting from discussion.

1 Like
42

Animals have mental suffering - they have the second arrow. So I do not see any problem here, no contradiction. All mammals have a variety of emotions, so have emotional pain. Birds less so perhaps but still do. Lizards seem less so than that, may have absence of second arrow for a lot of the time, but then periods of emotional experience.

2 Likes
43

Such an interesting discussion.

Having a chronic painful health condition, this issue has always been important to me

I’ve come to the conclusion (for the moment) that just because it is not ideal, doesn’t mean it is not so. I think that as long as we have physical bodies, our sense consciousnesses will continue to process signals from pain receptors. While it may be possible to suppress this by entering states where one has left the sense consciousnesses behind, as soon as one returns then the pain signals will be processed.

For me This is what makes it all the more important to practice, in order to escape this physical wheel of suffering.

I know from my own experiences, that the experience of pain can be lessened, by eradicating ‘the second dart’, as well as by relaxing and accepting pain. So this is pretty wonderful in and of itself.

Buddhism can’t offer what is impossible - while we abide in, and are conscious of our bodies, we must be subject to the physical conditions of the body.

The biggest challenge I find with unrelenting pain, is to be free of aversion… as it would be so nice not to be subject to this all the time. But we’re very lucky, we have medicines to assist with this.

Sorry I don’t have any specific texts to back up what I’m saying, but I think the texts quoted so far (Thank You for all of these!) are in line with such a view.

May all being be free of suffering, physical pain and mental anguish

Metta

5 Likes
44

This is my view too.

I find it hard to understand how cessation of mental anguish is the same as pain being no longer there. In my view, cessation here is just the mental stand point taken while pain still persists which is dukka.

I really do not understand the question here. But my open answer is yes they do suffer.
With Metta

45

It’s a tricky question, which rests on our understanding of what dukkha really is, and what the cessation of dukkha looks like - and when it occurs. Logically, cessation of dukkha would occur either at the point of Nibbana, or with the death of the Arahant. I find the suttas somewhat ambiguous actually. Nibbana is usually described as the cessation of the taints rather than the cessation of dukkha, though there are sutta passages which seem to describe the cessation of dukkha as a living experience for the Arahant, occurring at the point of Nibbana.

See for example the verses at the end of Dart Sutta, which includes a reference to the the “dust-free, sorrowless state”:

"The wise one, learned, does not feel
The pleasant and painful mental feeling.
This is the great difference between
The wise one and the worldling.

For the learned one who has comprehended Dhamma,
Who clearly sees this world and the next,
Desirable things do not provoke his mind,
Towards the undesired he has no aversion.

For him attraction and repulsion no more exist;
Both have been extinguished, brought to an end.
Having known the dust-free, sorrowless state,
The transcender of existence rightly understands."

1 Like
46

In the Dart Sutta the noble disciple is “detached” from suffering, and I assume that “suffering” here refers to dukkha. Is detachment from dukkha the same as cessation of dukkha, practically speaking? I assume that it is, though I might be wrong.

" If he feels a pleasant feeling, he feels it detached. If he feels a painful feeling, he feels it detached. If he feels a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he feels it detached. This, bhikkhus, is called a noble disciple who is detached from birth, aging, and death; who is detached from sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair; who is detached from suffering, I say."

2 Likes
47

I would think that detachment is only temporary, and cessation permanent …

1 Like
48

It might help to check the Pali word that has been translated as “detachment” here.

Here’s the Dart Sutta in Pali, we just need to work out which word it is.:yum:
https://suttacentral.net/pi/sn36.6

2 Likes
49

Well @Martin, I hope you can bear over with a not so skilled Sutta knower/translator, because I just responded more out of intuition than reason. Maybe I rather should withdraw and become one with my shame … :wink:

1 Like
50

Hi Senryu,

If you will, please allow me to play devil’s advocate for a moment.

Are you effectively saying that the capacity for basic emotion, (or perhaps even barely discernible moods, in the case of the lizard), qualifies as the potential to suffer. That such a situation qualifies as what is characterised and intended by the second dart in the suttas?

Because, it could be argued that to talk about the cessation of that dukkha, with language such as,

“he does not sorrow, grieve, or lament; he does not weep beating his breast and become distraught.”, and, “there can be no considering that as ‘me’ or ‘mine’ or ‘I am.’”

, appears to suggest that a more complex, and convoluted psychological ‘movement’ may be requisite to the arising of suffering. Basically, one that allows for a state of [mis]identification with the aggregates. A complexity that we might expect to have not yet developed in the case of babies, and perhaps even for the requisite mental apparatus, and faculties to be absent from the expression as a whole in the case of animals.

You see, it has been my experience that both, what is actually characterised by the second dart, and what the psychological capacity of babies, and animals actually is, can often be a matter of some contention. And that there are even those who will say, that in order for the state characterised in the second dart to come about, the capacity to conceptualise is requisite, and so by extension, babies, and animals simply do not have the capacity to suffer.

Just to be clear, that last part is certainly not a position I subscribe to.

51

Salayatana Nirodha or cessation of six senses is a synonym for Nibbana. This is IMo pretty much the same as saying cessation of taints because taints originate where senses contact objects. Nirodha here does not mean that six senses disappear or something in that respect but it means the stand point taken ie; being totally detached or not owning. I think it is this state which is described as dust free - sorrowless state.

I think it is the same because detachment comes from seeing the reality as such.
With Metta

2 Likes
52

Just to clarify, when I was talking about the situation as being “less than ideal”, I meant that taking either of the options (stances) being discussed was less than ideal, for the reasons I detailed, rather than an ongoing experience of pain being less than ideal, (which mightn’t be the case for the liberated for whom pain is merely tatha, but can certainly be for us mere mortals, some of whom, including yourself have referred to their discomfort on the thread, and with whom I sincerely sympathise).

I suspect you understood that anyway.

With metta.

1 Like
53

for an Arahant bodily pain is no longer dukkha.

I think you’ve quoted me quoting @Martin’s position there, but I also think you may have taken it out of context, if you read him as saying pain is no longer there. Maybe you were just expressing your opinion generally, and, I think @anon61506839 was saying something along those lines when he talked about the arhats experience of pain being akin to ‘tatha’ way back here (at least that is was lessened), and he was adamant nibbana and dukkha are mutually exclusive.

Honestly though, I’m losing the thread of the thread, I currently have distraction elsewhere which isn’t helping, apologies.

I really do not understand the question here. But my open answer is yes they do suffer.

I’ve since elaborated on that a bit in my reply to @Senryu’s reply to that post here, hopefully it might help in understanding where I was coming from with that.

Basically, if you take the position that dukkha is merely the psychological overlay on top of the pain, presumably consisiting of [mis]identification with the aggregates, does it not follow that babies, an animals can’t suffer, i.e. that they don’t have the requisite capacity to do so.

54

All I can say with confidence is that babies do have the notion of “I”. Simply because they cannot express it like adults does not mean they do not have a notion of self. Every living being possesses that notion. I think that notion is their capacity to conceptualize, in whatever way they do, therefore they do suffer.
With Metta

2 Likes
55

Me too. I’ve spent quite a lot of time reading and studying the suttas, but I’m certainly not an “expert”. I find discussions like this useful for clarifying what the suttas are describing.

2 Likes
56

Interesting point. The Second Noble Truth describes the cause of dukkha as tanha ( craving ), which implies that dukkha is a “psychological” rather than “physical” phenomena ( since craving is “psychological”, in the mind ). And when craving ceases, the cause of dukkha ceases, so logically dukkha will also cease.

There is also the verse from the Dart Sutta I quoted earlier, which in context seems to equate dukkha with mental rather than bodily feeling ( ie the second dart ).

“The wise one, learned, does not feel
The pleasant and painful mental feeling.
This is the great difference between
The wise one and the worldling.”

1 Like
57

Sure. Negative emotional affect = dukkha.

Plenty of animals experience sorrow, grief etc. Such as when an animal looses its partner, child, or good friend, or in the case of pets, its master. Elephants even grieve over old bones!

As for babies, ever seen a bay fall down or get something taken away from them, then cry cry cry, so wrapped up in negative emotional affect, but, then get distracted and all of that suddenly totally disappears! That is the dissapearance of the second arrow. Adults usually can’t have it vanish so quickly because their intellect tells them “hey, I am meant to be unhappy, I will not be so easily distracted from being stuck in dukha holding my second arrow!”

3 Likes
58

I recommend this book for anyone who wants to understand emotions deeply: